Site Search Navigation

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Supported by

Live-Blogging the New Hampshire Debate

By Katharine Q. Seelye June 3, 2007 7:01 pmJune 3, 2007 7:01 pm

(Photo: C.J. Gunther/European Pressphoto Agency)

9:15 p.m. With the debate over, most of the candidates have left, many to go to the Spin Room, or to mingle with the audience down on the floor. But here is where the rock stars separate themselves from the pack: Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton have moved to the edge of the stage and are reaching down to the audience to shake hands and sign autographs. Mr. Obama has become so engrossed that he has crouched down on the stage to be closer to eye level with the voters.

9 p.m. A revealing final question about each candidate’s priority as president: Mr. Edwards said the next president’s single greatest responsibility would be to re-establish our moral authority in the world. Mrs. Clinton: “Bring our troops home.” Mr. Obama agreed about bringing the troops home first, “then moving on health care.” Mr. Richardson said he would upgrade the schools, including setting a minimum wage of $40,000 for teachers. Mr. Biden would end the war in Iraq and defuse a possible war in Iran. As he said that the next president would be “left with no margin for error,” Mrs. Clinton was nodding in agreement. Most of these comments seemed to underscore the earlier consensus that Bill Clinton could be useful on the world stage. Mr. Kucinich said that the war could be stopped right now by not providing funding. Mr. Gravel, pointing at his fellow Democrats, said they could end the war if they want to. Mr. Dodd, with just a few seconds, said he would restore the constitutional rights in our country on his very first day as president.

8:55 p.m. Did Mrs. Clinton just say she would raise taxes? She said we had to cut spending and raise revenues.

For those keeping track — like Senator Dodd — of who is getting the most face time on the camera and in minutes, Mr. Obama is first, Mrs. Clinton second, and then Mr. Blitzer, the host.

8:44 p.m. Mrs. Clinton has dominated a good part of the evening; witness this interesting discussion about whether to assassinate Osama bin Laden (assuming he’s caught). Mr. Kucinich said he did not believe in assassination because it could come back to haunt the United States. Mr. Obama, who seemed to be making up for the first debate when he was perceived as not quick enough on the draw to say he would retaliate if we’re attacked, said of Mr. bin Laden, that he would “take him out.” Mrs. Clinton chimed in that her husband – who has been mentioned so often tonight that he might as well be running himself — actually DID try to take out Mr. bin Laden. When all the candidates were asked to raise their hands if they would assassinate Mr. bin Laden, Mrs. Clinton sook the lead: “We’re not going to engage in these hypotheticals,” she said, speaking for her colleagues on the stage. The audience responded with a big applause.8:24 p.m. Asked what would happen if diplomacy, which Mrs. Clinton proposed in dealing with Iran, failed, Mrs. Clinton got in a much-applauded dig at Vice President Cheney, saying he’s occasionally sent out on missions: “That’s hardly diplomatic in my view.”

7:59 p.m. Wolf Blitzer, the moderator, asked Mrs. Clinton if her husband’s policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” allowing gays to serve in the military, was right. She may have made a bit of news here, saying that it was “a transition policy” and that it was an important first step but that it has been implemented in a discriminatory way. She wouldn’t quite say it was a “mistake,” but she came close. When Mrs. Clinton was in high school back in the 60s, she was a Goldwater supporter, and she pulled out a quote from Mr. Goldwater tonight: “You don’t have to be straight to shoot straight.” Everyone on stage indicated (there go those hands again) that they would all revise the policy.

If Mr. Obama seems the unifier tonight, Mrs. Clinton seems the pragmatist. She took issue with a statement by Senator Joe Biden, saying that neither the president nor Congress can change things with a snap of the finger. To suggest so, she said forcefully, does “a grave disservice” to the political process.

7:48 p.m. Mrs. Clinton keeps bringing the focus back to the similarities among the Democrats, on the war, on health care — not the differences (those pesky reporters!). It serves her to blur the differences; it makes her seem less “radical” or “liberal” than her opponents on the right portray her.

7:36 p.m. This is an intense exchange about the authorization for the war, and it’s eliciting intense reactions. Mrs. Clinton seems impatient that she has to explain her view again. Asked whether she regretted voting to authorize the war without having read the National Intelligence Estimate, she said she was thoroughly briefed on the matter and sought out dissenting opinions.”I knew all the arguments,” she said. The best way to find out whether Saddam had WMD, she said, was to send in the inspectors.

Mr. Edwards said he agreed with “some of what Hillary said,” starting to sound conciliatory, but then he changed his tune. He pointed out that he was on the Intelligence Committee at the time and she was not. He had also not read the National Intelligence Estimate, but he said he read the summary. He also voted for the war, but as he noted, one difference he does have with Mrs. Clinton is that he has admitted he was wrong. “I should never have voted for this war,” he said, and gave credit to Mr. Obama for opposing the war (although Mr. Obama was not in the Senate at the time and did not have to vote).

Mr. Edwards then went on to bring up “the dishonesty of the last several years,” leaving open-ended the question of how far back he was going. Mr. Obama seemed to play the role of true conciliator, letting Mrs. Clinton off the hook, saying that having voted for the war is not a deal breaker for becoming the next president.

7:23 p.m. During this discussion, CNN has been showing reaction shots, with both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama looking pretty annoyed, especially with Mr. Edwards (who cited leadership as their difference). Mrs. Clinton said that the Democrats shouldn’t be fighting among themselves. “It’s George Bush’s war,” she said. Mr. Kucinich calls this a “teachable moment,” because the Democrats haven’t stopped the war.

7:15 p.m. Well, the candidates say they have more to agree on about the war in Iraq, than to disagree, but just wait. Senator Barack Obama just said Mr. Edwards was four-and-a-half years late on coming to his beliefs. Senator Biden started this, by saying basically he wouldn’t criticize his fellow colleagues even though he voted for the war spending bill and they voted against it. He doesn’t want to judge them, he said; they’re all “busting their necks” every day to end the war. But, hey wait a minute, Senator Edwards says yes, there are indeed differences. Senator Clinton, though, calls them minor.

GOFFSTOWN, N.H. — The candidates are lined up on stage. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is between former Senator John Edwards and Senator Barack Obama. They’re all in black tonight. Both Mrs. Clinton and Representative Dennis Kucinich have risers behind their podiums to give them a little lift. Mr. Kucinich’s riser is actually a little higher than Mrs. Clinton’s.

Sounds like a lot of the candidates are trying to ride in on Hillary’s coattails with their responses, especially Edwards. Barack seems to be making his own course on a lot of his answers but he is not taking enough issue with Clinton and Edwards support of the war in Iraq in 2003. This debate needs to field better informed questions because the candidates seem to be rehashing a lot of what they said in the previous debate.

Halfway through the first hour and Wolf Blitzer and other questioners are concentrating almost totally on Hillary, John and Barack, with an occasional nod to Biden. And Gravel, who doesn’t have the chance of the proverbial snowball. Including Dodd and Richardson once in a while would be nice. Richardson especially looks like he’s ready to gallop from behind his stand. Really chomping at the bit to answer a question.

Edwards was very gracious in his comments to Obama. I like his honesty in saying Obama was right on the war at the time and he himself was wrong. What’s also true, in my opinion, is that NOW Edwards is right on the war and is leading on the issue, while Obama and Clinton make cautious political calculations. We need leadership on this issue. Edwards is showing it.

Edwards was on fire with his response on health care. He has an excellent plan. I hope voters understood that from his quick summary. And he’s right: his plan is a universal health care plan, Obama’s is not.

Sounds like Biden just sunk any hope of a boost from this debate with that fence comment. Obama seems to be winning the crowd over, especially with his attack of the English-language question. Clinton also won some points with her rebuttal of Obama about a “national” language instead of an “official” language. This does seem like a lot of dodging of the issues and attempting to alienate some of the lesser-known candidates, which is inevitable in a early debate like this but it decreases the educational value of the debate for the average American watching at home.

I’ve got to echo Laura P.’s comments above, Edwards is the only one trying to unite people to end this war NOW. Obama and HRC just don’t get it, they seem afraid to take any action to end the war fearing it might cost them votes, they want to have it both ways….

About time there is someone talking about trying to solve the biggest historical problem this nation faces….the middle east. Iraq is a result of us not doing anything in that region. Thank you Bill Richardson.

Laura you’re right on with Edwards’ plan. Definitely the best one out there the problem is he hasn’t had the opportunity to properly explain it without it blurring into the other candidates policies. The “Dont ask don’t tell” policy question has provoked quite a spirited plethora of responses but no outstanding substance. The Bill Clinton question was best answered by Bill Richardson. B. Clinton needs to be the point man on the middle east. Obama and H. Clinton also shined on this but not as much as Richardson.

Edwards and Obama are the only candidates that seem mostly honest to me(at least the only viable candidates).

Hillary Clinton is much too calculating and expedient, and I will not support 4 to 8 years of that. I simply do not trust her to do the right thing.

Edwards and Obama are concerned about the same things I am concerned about: decent healthcare for Americans, a rational energy policy and a sane security and emergency management policy that really protects us at home instead of not protecting us while chipping away at the Bill of rates.

Furthermore, Obama and Edwards are tough enough and principled enough to carry this off; the same can’t be said for Clinton.

Edwards is indeed the most honest and straightforward. And he is extremely knowledgeable and also understands the importance of leadership in a president. Clinton is a master at evading the question while sounding like she is answering it.

I think Sen. Clinton missed a punch line on how she would use one “former” President: George W. Bush. What use could our current President serve get this country back on the right track that he so zealously got off the track?

Will someone address the behavior of Putin….he’s pushing toward a new cold war. He controls Europes fuel supply and is beating his chest about our policies worldwide. Russia is going to be an issue not long from now…and one of these candidates might have to deal with it.

What did Richards do to his hair? It looks charcoal-black, fake and helmet-like. If it is his real hair, his stylist made it look like a wig. If it is fake–Letterman, Stewart and Leno will crush him like a bug. Tossle Richardson Tossle !

While Mrs. Clinton says that “neither the president nor Congress can change things with a snap of the finger,” we know from common memory that the war was quickly launched, and that the establishment Democrats have yet to reflect the majority public opinion in favor of making the war impossible to continue by cutting off funding. A candidate will impress me by taking the strongest pro-peace position, without diluting it or shirking the mandate.

President Obama drew criticism on Thursday when he said, “we don’t have a strategy yet,” for military action against ISIS in Syria. Lawmakers will weigh in on Mr. Obama’s comments on the Sunday shows.Read more…